FBI statistics show 4 active shooters were stopped by armed citizens in 2021

[2aguy]

At least I want SOMETHING done. Which is how I know I still have a conscience.

No, you don’t want “something done, “ since nothing you want does anything….you are an empty gesture dancing on the dead to push gun control….

We want to stop these attacks

-arm staff at schools

- use the unused Covid money to put in actual security at schools

- you here possible out in armed guards

-teach people who may have dangerous individuals in their families to go to the police

- place actually dangerous mentally I’ll individuals in psychiatric hospitals

Those are samples of “doing something.”

What these examples don’t do is exploit the deaths of children to push your gun control dreams

 

[2aguy]

So should we get rid of police and just replace it with randos carrying concealed weapons? You know the "wild west" fantasy you live in wasn't that big of a chunk of American history and there's a reason people don't walk around like in the wild-west towns in those movies you watched. It's because that isn't what civilization looks like.



SHE saved lives. But "...Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense." (SOURCE)

It's like pointing to someone who hit the jackpot in Vegas on a slot machine and suggesting that that is how EVERYONE should make a living.

Yeah, that “source” is crap

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

We already care, we propose actual solutions…you morons just want to ban guns from people who commit no crimes.

What are those solutions again? I can't recall. It seems that everything is killed in Congress.

Remind me, please.

Oh, you mean Ted Cruz's "one door policy"? Yeah, that's a fire code violation. You mean more teachers armed with guns? LOL. The POLICE in Uvalde were reticent to engage that shooter...and they are TRAINED FOR YEARS IN WEAPONS HANDLING...what chance does a 3rd grade teacher stand? You want hardened schools? Yeah! Why NOT turn schools into prisons since we lead the world in prison population already.

Your solutions are shit. That's because you are unable to face the facts of your hobby.

Your hobby facilitates people doing bad things. Even if you never do a bad thing with your gun, you are part of the problem. You have swamped our nation with your toys and those toys wind up in the hands of nuts who then EFFICIENTLY murder 20 little kids IN FRONT OF THE POLICE.

 

[Captain Caveman]

When normal people can carry their guns they save lives

Read more: New FBI Report Shows Armed Citizens STOP Mass Shootings
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

newly-released FBI report on “active shooter incidents” in 2021 [embeded below] revealed four of those killers were stopped by armed private citizens

It's a shame you didn't stop the one that blasted 19 people away, mostly kids. But there again, your constitution did arm him willy nilly.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Leftist claim hugs work better.

Actually, brains work better, that's why gun nuts will never work better at this problem.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

No, you don’t want “something done, “ since nothing you want does anything….you are an empty gesture dancing on the dead to push gun control….

We want to stop these attacks

-arm staff at schools

LOL. The police in Uvalde didn't even go into the school when the shooting was going on. What is the likelihood that a teacher (not trained in the same level as police) would be able to do better?

- use the unused Covid money to put in actual security at schools

Turn schools into prisons. Got it.

- you here possible out in armed guards

Yup...prisons.

-teach people who may have dangerous individuals in their families to go to the police

I doubt that people who obsessively love GUNS over children are able to "teach" anyone about mental health signs.

- place actually dangerous mentally I’ll individuals in psychiatric hospitals

Sorry but that train sailed. In the 1960's we started closing down the institutions and no one picked up the slack for community care (too much cost and we know you good conservatives don't ever want to pay anything for stuff) and finally your guy Ronny Raygun in the 1980's finished the job.

If you want those places opened up again, perhaps you'll be willing to pay a surcharge for your hobby of guns to fund it? (I bet not...you don't actually care about the mentally ill, they are useful TOOL to distract people from talking about your precious guns)

Those are samples of “doing something.”

Stupid samples.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Yeah, that “source” is crap

Isn't it amazing that NO MATTER WHICH SCIENTIFIC STUDY COMES OUT you scientific illiterates don't "believe" it?

Huh.

Color me surprised.

 

[ding]

-sigh- And again....



Are you OK with 20 dead little kids? That's "acceptable" to you? Wow, you are creepy and sick.

No. That's why we have laws against it, dummy.

You're the one arguing for more gun control laws, right? Would you like to ban and confiscate all firearms?

 

[ding]

Wow, you are creepy and sick.

You are pure evil.

 

[Abatis]

Well, then I guess we leave it to the psychopaths who are OK with 20 little kids getting gunned down.

Over. And OVer. And over again.

One can be horrified and heartbroken that innocents suffered such a crime and still demand government maintain respect for and obey the Constitution.

The clamoring for a wish-list of laws to be enacted is a fruitless exercise if there isn't an equally energetic inspection and understanding of what laws can be enacted.

You are skipping that, if not baldly ignoring that there are things that simply can't be done.

 

[Abatis]

Why do you guys always view the options as one of two extremes:

Sez the bootlicking leftist statist authoritarian whose response to someone arguing the government does not possess unlimited power and must follow the Constitution, is that I'm a psychopath who is OK with 20 little kids getting gunned down.

.

 

[Jimmy_Chitwood]

Actually, brains work better, that's why gun nuts will never work better at this problem.

Need a hug sugar?

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Sez the bootlicking leftist statist authoritarian whose response to someone arguing the government does not possess unlimited power and must follow the Constitution, is that I'm a psychopath who is OK with 20 little kids getting gunned down.

.

Well, I don't see any dictators on the rise here in AMerica (I mean, your guy Trump obviously wanted that and he roused his gravy seals to do it on Jan 6, but because gravy seals are inherently lazy and have a short attention span, the coup didn't go very far). So you'll forgive me if I focus on what I DO see which is 20 (and counting) dead kids due to a guy who LEGALLY purchased a gun and used it to murder them.

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

One can be horrified and heartbroken that innocents suffered such a crime and still demand government maintain respect for and obey the Constitution.

Not when the Constitution has been twisted to turn America into an armed encampment. Unlike you I don't WORSHIP the Constitution. I see it as a guide to running the country. Given that the Second Amendment has been re-interpretted to mean just any yahoo who can rub two neurons together can get a gun I'm thinking that we need to amend some stuff.

You may not know this, but the US Constitution has the ability to be AMENDED. It isn't the word of God writ in stone!

You are skipping that, if not baldly ignoring that there are things that simply can't be done.

I'd ask why America is so different from any other first world developed uber-rich nation but I'm sure your answer would reveal a lot more unpleasantness about your world views than anyone really wants to hear.

 

[Batcat]

That's GREAT! And given that there were something like 693 mass shootings in 2021 with 702 people killed that's really impressive. If only those 4 people had been able to stop the other 702 deaths!

Many mass shootings are carried out in gun free zones because the shooter doesn’t want to run into an armed citizen.

Most legally armed citizens will not be packing heat in gun free zones as they are honest and law abiding people Who obey rules.

Any gun free zone that usually has a large number of people should also be required to have armed guards. For example a movie theater that posts a no guns sign should have armed security.

Did Colorado shooter single out Cinemark theater because it banned guns?

Most movie theaters allow permit holders carrying guns. But the Cinemark movie theater was the only one with a sign posted at the theater’s entrance.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Cardinal Carminative]

Many mass shootings are carried out in gun free zones because the shooter doesn’t want to run into an armed citizen.

Thank heavens there were so many armed policemen in Texas waiting outside of the room he was in then!

Most legally armed citizens will not be packing heat in gun free zones as they are honest and law abiding people Who obey rules.

No one debates that good people are good people. The real problem is good people who love guns have turned this country into a giant tub full of guns which makes those guns more likely to fall into the hands of those who are NOT good people.

We've made guns so available this 18 year old kid in Texas could legally buy one and go use it to murder school kids.

Studies also show that a gun in the home is far more likely to be used on someone in that household than it would ever be used in self-defense.

Any gun free zone that usually has a large number of people should also be required to have armed guards. For example a movie theater that posts a no guns sign should have armed security.

Your vision for America as being a giant armed encampment and every public event has armed guards all around it is inspiring. It will DEFINITELY drive home how FREE we all are here thanks to the Second Amendment!

 

[2aguy]

So should we get rid of police and just replace it with randos carrying concealed weapons? You know the "wild west" fantasy you live in wasn't that big of a chunk of American history and there's a reason people don't walk around like in the wild-west towns in those movies you watched. It's because that isn't what civilization looks like.



SHE saved lives. But "...Guns kept in homes are more likely to be involved in a fatal or nonfatal accidental shooting, criminal assault, or suicide attempt than to be used to injure or kill in self-defense." (SOURCE)

It's like pointing to someone who hit the jackpot in Vegas on a slot machine and suggesting that that is how EVERYONE should make a living.

Wow...you are dumb.

The police can't be everywhere.....like at that school when the guy just walked in...then the police waited for an hour to go in....

If the killer knew that there were multiple armed staff members and he didn't know who they were or where they were, he wouldn't have picked that school to attack...you doofus....

Americans use their legal guns 1.1 million times a year to stop rapes, robberies, murders, and yes, even mass public shootings....that is according to the Centers for Disease Control....the Department of Justice research puts the number at 1.5 million times a year........

Total killed in mass public shootings in 2021.......43....

Can you tell which number is bigger?

 

[2aguy]

Thank heavens there were so many armed policemen in Texas waiting outside of the room he was in then!



No one debates that good people are good people. The real problem is good people who love guns have turned this country into a giant tub full of guns which makes those guns more likely to fall into the hands of those who are NOT good people.

We've made guns so available this 18 year old kid in Texas could legally buy one and go use it to murder school kids.

Studies also show that a gun in the home is far more likely to be used on someone in that household than it would ever be used in self-defense.



Your vision for America as being a giant armed encampment and every public event has armed guards all around it is inspiring. It will DEFINITELY drive home how FREE we all are here thanks to the Second Amendment!

No....those studies you keep repeating, show that it isn't the gun...it is the criminal, the actual criminal, living in the home, the drug addict, and the alcoholic that determine the violence in the home, not the gun....you doofus...

Here...actual research...

https://crimeresearch.org/wp-conten...ack-of-Public-Health-Research-on-Firearms.pdf

3. The Incredibly Flawed Public Health Research Guns in the Home At a town hall at George Mason University in January 2016, President Obama said, “If you look at the statistics, there's no doubt that there are times where somebody who has a weapon has been able to protect themselves and scare off an intruder or an assailant, but what is more often the case is that they may not have been able to protect themselves, but they end up being the victim of the weapon that they purchased themselves.”25 The primary proponents of this claim are Arthur Kellermann and his many coauthors. A gun, they have argued, is less likely to be used in killing a criminal than it is to be used in killing someone the gun owner knows. In one of the most well-known public health studies on firearms, Kellermann’s “case sample” consists of 444 homicides that occurred in homes. His control group had 388 individuals who lived near the deceased victims and were of the same sex, race, and age range. After learning about the homicide victims and control subjects—whether they owned a gun, had a drug or alcohol problem, etc.—these authors attempted to see if the probability of a homicide correlated with gun ownership. Amazingly these studies assume that if someone died from a gun shot, and a gun was owned in the home, that it was the gun in the home that killed that person. The paper is clearly misleading, as it fails to report that in only 8 of these 444 homicide cases was the gun that had been kept in the home the murder weapon.Moreover, the number of criminals stopped with a gun is much higher than the number killed in defensive gun uses. In fact, the attacker is killed in fewer than 1 out of every 1,000 defensive gun uses. Fix either of these data errors and the results are reversed. To demonstrate, suppose that we use the same statistical method—with a matching control group—to do a study on the efficacy of hospital care. Assume that we collect data just as these authors did, compiling a list of all the people who died in a particular county over the period of a year. Then we ask their relatives whether they had been admitted to the hospital during the previous year. We also put together a control sample consisting of neighbors who are part of the same sex, race, and age group. Then we ask these men and women whether they have been in a hospital during the past year. My bet is that those who spent time in hospitals are much more likely to have died.


Nine Myths Of Gun Control

Myth #6 "A homeowner is 43 times as likely to be killed or kill a family member as an intruder"

To suggest that science has proven that defending oneself or one's family with a gun is dangerous, gun prohibitionists repeat Dr. Kellermann's long discredited claim: "a gun owner is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder." [17] This fallacy , fabricated using tax dollars, is one of the most misused slogans of the anti-self-defense lobby.

The honest measure of the protective benefits of guns are the lives saved, the injuries prevented, the medical costs saved, and the property protected not Kellermann's burglar or rapist body count.

Only 0.1% (1 in a thousand) of the defensive uses of guns results in the death of the predator. [3]

Any study, such as Kellermann' "43 times" fallacy, that only counts bodies will expectedly underestimate the benefits of gun a thousand fold.

Think for a minute. Would anyone suggest that the only measure of the benefit of law enforcement is the number of people killed by police? Of course not. The honest measure of the benefits of guns are the lives saved, the injuries prevented, the medical costs saved by deaths and injuries averted, and the property protected. 65 lives protected by guns for every life lost to a gun. [2]

Kellermann recently downgraded his estimate to "2.7 times," [18] but he persisted in discredited methodology. He used a method that cannot distinguish between "cause" and "effect." His method would be like finding more diet drinks in the refrigerators of fat people and then concluding that diet drinks "cause" obesity.


Also, he studied groups with high rates of violent criminality, alcoholism, drug addiction, abject poverty, and domestic abuse .


From such a poor and violent study group he attempted to generalize his findings to normal homes

Interestingly, when Dr. Kellermann was interviewed he stated that, if his wife were attacked, he would want her to have a gun for protection.[19] Apparently, Dr. Kellermann doesn't even believe his own studies.


-----


Public Health and Gun Control: A Review



Since at least the mid-1980s, Dr. Kellermann (and associates), whose work had been heavily-funded by the CDC, published a series of studies purporting to show that persons who keep guns in the home are more likely to be victims of homicide than those who don¹t.

In a 1986 NEJM paper, Dr. Kellermann and associates, for example, claimed their "scientific research" proved that defending oneself or one¹s family with a firearm in the home is dangerous and counter productive, claiming "a gun owner is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder."8

In a critical review and now classic article published in the March 1994 issue of the Journal of the Medical Association of Georgia (JMAG), Dr. Edgar Suter, Chairman of Doctors for Integrity in Policy Research (DIPR), found evidence of "methodologic and conceptual errors," such as prejudicially truncated data and the listing of "the correct methodology which was described but never used by the authors."5

Moreover, the gun control researchers failed to consider and underestimated the protective benefits of guns.

Dr. Suter writes: "The true measure of the protective benefits of guns are the lives and medical costs saved, the injuries prevented, and the property protected ‹ not the burglar or rapist body count.

Since only 0.1 - 0.2 percent of defensive uses of guns involve the death of the criminal, any study, such as this, that counts criminal deaths as the only measure of the protective benefits of guns will expectedly underestimate the benefits of firearms by a factor of 500 to 1,000."5

In 1993, in his landmark and much cited NEJM article (and the research, again, heavily funded by the CDC), Dr. Kellermann attempted to show again that guns in the home are a greater risk to the victims than to the assailants.4 Despite valid criticisms by reputable scholars of his previous works (including the 1986 study), Dr. Kellermann ignored the criticisms and again used the same methodology.

He also used study populations with disproportionately high rates of serious psychosocial dysfunction from three selected state counties, known to be unrepresentative of the general U.S. population.

For example,

53 percent of the case subjects had a history of a household member being arrested,

31 percent had a household history of illicit drug use, 32 percent had a household member hit or hurt in a family fight, and

17 percent had a family member hurt so seriously in a domestic altercation that prompt medical attention was required.
Moreover, both the case studies and control groups in this analysis had a very high incidence of financial instability.

In fact, in this study, gun ownership, the supposedly high risk factor for homicide was not one of the most strongly associated factors for being murdered.

Drinking, illicit drugs, living alone, history of family violence, living in a rented home were all greater individual risk factors for being murdered than a gun in the home. One must conclude there is no basis to apply the conclusions of this study to the general population.

All of these are factors that, as Dr. Suter pointed out, "would expectedly be associated with higher rates of violence and homicide."5

It goes without saying, the results of such a study on gun homicides, selecting this sort of unrepresentative population sample, nullify the authors' generalizations, and their preordained, conclusions can not be extrapolated to the general population.

Moreover, although the 1993 New England Journal of Medicine study purported to show that the homicide victims were killed with a gun ordinarily kept in the home, the fact is that as Kates and associates point out 71.1 percent of the victims were killed by assailants who did not live in the victims¹ household using guns presumably not kept in that home.6

 

[Batcat]

Thank heavens there were so many armed policemen in Texas waiting outside of the room he was in then!



No one debates that good people are good people. The real problem is good people who love guns have turned this country into a giant tub full of guns which makes those guns more likely to fall into the hands of those who are NOT good people.

We've made guns so available this 18 year old kid in Texas could legally buy one and go use it to murder school kids.

Studies also show that a gun in the home is far more likely to be used on someone in that household than it would ever be used in self-defense.



Your vision for America as being a giant armed encampment and every public event has armed guards all around it is inspiring. It will DEFINITELY drive home how FREE we all are here thanks to the Second Amendment!

Most of these mass shooters displayed serious mental issues but they never were entered on the NICS background check list that would have stopped them from legally buying a firearm. We need to work on treating serious mental problems in our nation and improve the background check system for firearms.

Until the smart Democrats came along and stoped prosecuting criminals and the COVID-19 virus caused numerous prisoners to be released from prisons the crime rate was falling in this nation despite the fact that gun sales were skyrocketing. Even so we are behind the peak of violent crime in our nation in the 1990s despite the fact that gun sales have sky rocketed in this nation since then.

Now we find civIlians shot more bad guys than cops last year. Undoubtedly that stopped a lot of murders, robberies and rapes.

This data from the FBI on armed self defense in 2020 will surprise you

“Gun prohibitionists who enjoy their own private security while promoting restrictive laws...are world-class hypocrites.”--Alan Gottlieb, CCRKBA

www.ammoland.com

Read more: This data from the FBI on armed self defense in 2020 will surprise you
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook
U.S.A. –-(AmmoLand.com)- One stunning revelation in the FBI Uniform Crime Report for 2020 is that armed private citizens fatally shot more criminals during the commission of felonies than police, a fact that seems to be avoided by the establishment media.

According to the FBI’s expanded homicide data for 2020, law enforcement used firearms 298 times in fatal line-of-duty shootings, while private citizens killed 343 suspected felons “during the commission of a felony.”

The data, which updates figures posted for 2019 last year, shows that in 2019, police and private citizens killed the same number of felons (334) during the commission of crimes.​

Alan Gottlieb, chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, was not surprised by the new data.

“If the FBI data published in their crime report for 2020 is accurate,” he said, “it is ample evidence that the individual right to keep and bear arms for personal defense is as important today as it was when the Second Amendment was adopted as a cornerstone of the Bill of Rights.

Of course most encounters between armed citizens and criminals do not result in dead criminals. Often the criminal realizing his victim is armed just runs away. Sometimes shots are exchanged and all miss or someone is wounded. It is hard to protect how many times a armed citizen stops a crime every year but the figure is quite high.

Guns Prevent Thousands of Crimes Every Day, Research Shows | Lawrence W. Reed

The Center for Disease Control, in a report ordered by President Obama in 2012 following the Sandy Hook Massacre, estimated that the number of crimes prevented by guns could be as high as 3 million annually, or some 8,200 every day. And there is plenty more evidence showing that guns keep...

fee.org

Plus Obama actually caused a study of the civilian use of firearms by executive order that you likely never heard of. The reason for that is the report was POSITIVE for the civilian ownership of firearms.

Obama Study Concluded Firearms Used for Self-Defense ‘Important Crime Deterrent’

Your can read this report here:

Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence |The National Academies Press

Download a PDF of "Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence" by the Institute of Medicine and for free.

nap.nationalacademies.org